spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online 25 June 2008
doi: 10.1242/dev.015909


Development 135, 2511-2520 (2008)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2008


This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Material
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gaunt, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Trubshaw, R. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gaunt, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Trubshaw, R. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Increased Cdx protein dose effects upon axial patterning in transgenic lines of mice

Stephen J. Gaunt*, Deborah Drage and Richard C. Trubshaw

Department of Development and Genetics, The Babraham Institute, Babraham, Cambridge CB22 3AT, UK.


Figure 1
View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 1. Mouse Cdx gene overexpresser (OE) constructs for preparation of transgenic mice. The OE constructs (A-C) were derived as modifications of Cdx/lacZ reporter constructs (D-F) previously found to mimic expression of endogenous Cdx genes in early embryos (Gaunt et al., 2003Go; Gaunt et al., 2005Go). (G-I) Cdx1, Cdx2 and Cdx4 genomic maps. Grey boxes indicate Cdx exons; hatched boxes indicate lacZ/SV40polyA DNA; K, KpnI; H, HindIII; R, EcoRI; Sp, SpeI; Bg, BglII; S, SalI.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (123K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 2. OE1 and OE2 mice and embryos display externally visible abnormalities with penetrance varying from severe to non-detected. (A,B) OE1 transgenic mice commonly display defective forelimbs. (C,D) OE2 mice commonly display kinked tails with terminal scabs in newborns. (E-G) Smaller forelimb buds (with dotted green outline) are commonly seen at 10.5 days in OE1 embryos (F) relative to wild type (E) and OE2 (G). Embryos are stained for Mox1 mRNA to facilitate assignment of prevertebral (v) addresses. The OE2 embryo possesses a club-tail.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 3. OE embryos display elevated Cdx protein concentrations and normal location of mRNA expression. (A) Western blots showing time-course of Cdx1, Cdx2 and Cdx4 protein levels in the primitive streak/tailbud region of normal embryos. Replicate tissue samples are examined for each protein. Cdx1 bands lie just below a 37 kDa marker protein (not shown); Cdx2 and Cdx4 bands lie just above. (B) Western blot showing time-course of Cdx2 protein in OE2 line 1 embryos. (C) Western blots comparing Cdx protein concentrations in tailbuds of stage-matched transgenic versus non-transgenic (NT) littermates sired by Cdx overexpresser (OE) mice. Results are shown for lines 1 and 2 of each OE type, and the Cdx2 blot also includes embryos sired by the peak-expresser stud. The fold-levels of overexpression for each OE line, assessed by densitometry, are indicated. (D) Expression of OE transgenes (line 1 for each) detected by in situ hybridization of the lacZ/SV40 probe to 8.5 to 8.7 day embryos.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (70K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 4. Cdx2 protein gradients detected by immunohistochemistry in 8.7 day embryos. (A-C) Wild-type embryos. (D) OE2 transgenic embryo. C is an enlargement of the field boxed in A. B is a section from a similar embryo cut along the plane shown in A. nt, neural tube; psm, presomitic mesoderm; ant, anterior; post, posterior; S, somite. Scale bar: 0.25 mm.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (78K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 5. Vertebral homeotic transformations in the neck and anterior thoracic region of OE mice compared with wild type. (A-H) Lateral views of skeletons. There is wide variability within OE1 (A-D), OE2 (E,F) and OE4 mouse lines in the extent of their defects. Arrows indicate anterior tuberculi, which are normally on vertebra 6.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (118K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 6. Vertebral homeotic transformations in the posterior thoracic and lumbosacral region of OE mice compared with wild type. (A,B) Dorsal views; numbers indicate the most anterior vertebrae bearing ribs, most posterior vertebrae bearing ribs and the first sacral vertebrae. (C-F) Ventral views; numbers indicate the most anterior vertebrae bearing ribs, most posterior vertebrae with ribs attached to sternum, and most posterior vertebrae bearing ribs. f, fused ribs. A, C and Fig. 5A show different views of the same skeleton.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (117K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 7. Abnormalities in the lumbar, sacral and tail regions of OE2 mice. (A,B) Numbers indicate the most posterior vertebrae bearing ribs and the first sacral vertebrae. Green dots in B show the outline of the tail. Mis-alignments of lumbar (C) and caudal (D) vertebrae. (E) Wild-type tail. (F-H) Arrows show split centres of ossification (F) and multiple tail axes. (I) Club-tail of Bouin's fixed 10.5 day OE2 peak-expresser sired embryo showing irregularly sized and spaced somites (small arrows) and, in transverse section (J), failure of neural tube closure and increased mass of mesodermal component relative to wild type (K). Large arrow in I shows the level of section J. L, lumbar vertebra; np, neural plate; nt, neural tube; s, somitic mesoderm; n, notochord; g, hindgut. Scale bar: 0.2 mm in J,K.

 

Figure 8
View larger version (90K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 8. Cdx OE embryos show forward shifts in Hoxa7/lacZ expression without, necessarily, earlier activation. (A-D) At 10.5 days, the anterior boundaries in prevertebrae (v), lateral plate mesoderm (lpm) and spinal ganglia (sg) of wild-type (A) and OE (B-D) embryos are shown. The OE2 embryo possesses a club-tail. (E) At 8 to 8.25 days, OE1 and OE4 embryos commence Hox/lacZ activity in the primitive streak region (white arrows) at apparently the same developmental stage (headfold) as wild-type (non OE) embryos.

 

Figure 9
View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 9. Possible role of Cdx protein gradients in the refinement of Hox expression boundaries. It is proposed that the rate and extent of co-linear activation of Hox genes (temporal co-linearity) varies with the concentration of Cdx protein (grey). Early expression of each Hox gene (A,B) occurs in the primitive streak/tailbud (TB), assumed here to extend forward to the level of the node. Anterior to this, within neurectoderm, presomitic, somitic and lateral plate mesoderms, each Cdx protein forms a posterior-to-anterior gradient by time-dependent decay. A Hox gene with high sensitivity to Cdx dose may become progressively activated along the Cdx gradient in a spreading wave that moves forward ahead of cell position (such as Hox1, blue in B). An example would be Hoxb8 expression in the mouse neural tube (Forlani et al., 2003Go). The spreading wave stops when Cdx protein concentration becomes limiting, and the time at which this occurs is influenced by the continuous regression of the Cdx gradient. A Hox gene less sensitive to Cdx dose may not spread forward, and may indeed show some posterior regression relative to cell position owing to Cdx gradient regression (Hox2, red in C). Examples here might be Hoxb8 expression in mouse paraxial mesoderm (Forlani et al., 2003Go) and Hoxb9 expression in chick neurectoderm (Bel-Vialar et al., 2002Go). The Cdx morphogen gradient may thus operate by adjusting Hox boundaries forwards or backwards according to Hox gene sensitivities. We assume here that similar mechanisms operate in neural and mesoderm tissues, and the more anterior Hox boundaries in neural tissue may then be explained by the more anterior boundaries of Cdx proteins in neural versus mesoderm tissues (Fig. 4). At a specific point in the maturation of neural and mesoderm tissues, it is envisaged that the boundaries of Hox gene expression become fixed by mechanisms such as auto- and crossregulation between Hox genes and their products (Gould et al., 1997Go; Zappavigna et al., 1991Go), and/or by establishment of the Polycomb silencing mechanism (Akasaka et al., 2001Go).

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2008